South Fraser Perimeter Road/Highway 17 Extension | Completed

[makr3trkr]

Same today - East and west backed up, 91 Connector road clear

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by jhausner

As someone who drives this route every single day, I wanted to point out a few missing facts to the cause of the congestion.

1) Some of the congestion is due to the intersection because you get trucks turning left in front of Eastbound SFPR on red lights. Not just going through a light turning red, I mean it is already red. I've sat eastbound and our light goes green and a truck in the left turn just turns right in front of everyone.

I still stand by the notion that if you stationed a cop at that intersection every single day, they'd write about $20,000 in tickets every day.

2) The backups for the left-turn (what causes all the trucks and cars to run the red) is actually not a result of the intersection at SFPR but rather a result of the 1 lane overpass + left turn design of the connector to get onto the Alex Fraser bridge.

People line up trying to turn left onto HWY91 onto the Alex Fraser and as the overpass is 1 lane from the SFPR (and actually is like 3 lanes into 1 lane) everyone gets stuck and that lines up all the way to the SFPR.

So then people turning left off SFPR get stuck. It can take you 30 minutes (I kid you not) to get from the left lane from SFPR Westbound to the Alex Fraser bridge. Something that with no traffic takes about 2 minutes.

See the following image for the problem points. Bottom arrow is where 3 lanes --> 1 lane over the overpass. Second arrow is the left turn across Nodel to get on the AFB that backs up causing even people that just want to go straight through to get stuck behind all the left-turners on the overpass. Also keep in mind you have a truck weigh scale on the other side of the overpass so 23723928 trucks along that stretch which are slow and can't turn very quickly.





My fear is that with an interchange you will solve Eastbound issues but Westbound will compound even worse because trucks again getting off and onto the connector to Alex Fraser will line up onto the highway westbound at the exit. Similar to what happens at Steveston through the tunnel. It will line up through the tunnel in the right lane in rush-hour just because of people stuck trying to exit at Steveston.

So they really need to not just put an interchange at SFPR there but also need to widen the overpass over HWY91 and remove the left turn across Nordel making it a proper interchange onto AFB.

The Nordel Interchange with Hwy 91 either needs a loop added to the SE quadrant to facilitate the turning traffic northbound to the AFB, or an (expensive) flyover ramp for the turn. I'm not sure what the lesser of two evils is here construction-wise since the loop would impact the bog more.

Of course, given the stalemate over the 91/72nd interchange, I guess we shouldn't hold our breath...

[makr3trkr]

Monday afternoon: ~2km congestion. Connector road clear.

[MIPS]

That entrance to 19 has ALWAYS been a nightmare.

I can easily recall times before the SFPR was even there where I would get off work and wait in a lineup just for the traffic on Nordel to clear so I could make the on-ramp at all. The SFPR just made it much, much worse.

[Metro-One]

Given the confluence of the 91, the SFPR, and Nordel Way a Cape Horne style interchange is what is needed in this location

The original diamond interchange proposed likely would not have been much better than the current situation.

[xd_1771]

The whole south end of the AFB seems like an interesting puzzle, really. You could spend all the money on interchanges and such and that wouldn't solve the problem that we have all this traffic needing to merge down to 3 lanes on the bridge. Build a flyover off-ramp from the connector EB to AFB NB and you'd still have lots of congestion as the flyover traffic then tries to merge with 2 lanes of WB commuter traffic from Nordel Way to 1 lane going up a bridge - or attempt to short-merge with the 91 itself.

I'm not saying the solution is to bring the AFB to 4 lanes in each direction or anything like that, but it's pretty clear that the situation we've created is more complicated than whatever road expansion there will allow. Something tells me that trying to get as much of this traffic as we can onto viable alternate routes (ahem - the underused PMB) is a part of the ultimate answer. On top of that though we could then run into issues in New West with no NFPR upgrades, limited capacity on existing arterial roads and moreso on the Queensborough Bridge. With this in mind, congestion pricing is seeming like a very good idea (to at least give us some funding to build quality transit alternatives for commuters...)

[WarrenC12]

Tolling it would solve the problem.

[TransitJack]

The AFB connection to SFPR is inefficient.
I don't take this connection often, living in Vancouver and working in Richmond. However, last week I had to head out to Maple Ridge around 2pm from work. Last time I made this journey I took the toll-free journey the old-school way, Queensborough through New West and Front Street towards Hwy 1 before going along Mary Hill. It was a mess and a pain all through New West, so this time I thought, take AFB to Hwy 17 and pay the toll on the GEB.

The webcam photos show clearly my area of frustration immediately after coming off the AFB: TRAFFIC LIGHTS. The first set I can almost understand, existing lights to access the industrial area, but the one pictured, to make a righthand turn to go EB on Hwy 17 is ridiculous. Why didn't they just create a merge lane like a normal highway? I get that the was originally to be a interchange, but having changed to a signalled intersection, why didn't they consider merge lanes? The whole area was a cluster of trucks in all lanes, people zipping left and right. All I could think of is what a moronic decision to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a new road, only to cheap out at the most critical points.

Such a crappy connection in all ways for Hwy 17 to Hwy 91. All for barely a kilometre of distance one needs to navigate the boondoggle of traffic lights and truck mayhem.

The tail end of my journey I again became frustrated by the same cost-saving measures... no immediate connection to the Golden Ear's way without first driving up a steep hill, navigating trucks and traffic lights to access GEW, drop back down a hill at no faster than 60kph on a parkway :kook:, face a couple more traffic lights and finally onto a spiffy bridge with a ridiculously low speed limit.

I understand there is a connection being build for GEW/GEB to Hwy 17 to save the journey up the hill and back down (Crossing Hwy 1 two times in the process) that is still yet to be commissioned.

In the end, for my 3ish bucks toll, I would say that the route could have been a breeze. Allowing an easy bypass of busy New West and getting to points East quickly. And, one one the roadway under the Port Mann and such it was a nice drive, however, the frustrations with connections at both ends of my segment really would make me question the wisdom of those who make decisions and are willing to spend so much money and then cheap out at critical points.

Did it save me any time? Maybe 5 mins or so. But with a few more efficiencies it could have been easily 15-20 min savings.

#rant

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

What you wrote is correct. It is normal (often in the AM) for the entire connector road to be clogged.

However, yesterday evening specifically, the connector road was not backed up that far (see above).

Just building an interchange would not necessarily alleviate the morning congestion, as pointed out.

Yah not the only cause. It is definitely a contributing factor though (the intersection) because like you said sometime the collector is empty and it still backs up Eastbound or even Westbound. Trucks turning contribute partially, and also eastbound trucks just accelerating. You have a traffic light that is technically on an up-hill eastbound. I've seen it before where the light turns green and in the left lane 30 cars get through but only 2 trucks and 1 car get through in the right.

So you effectively have 1 lane getting through the intersection because the container trucks that are loaded heavy are just so slow to get going up the viaduct hill.

Interchange could help alleviate that.

But like I said multiple causes and an interchange doesn't solve _all_ of them though it is a step in the right direction for sure.

[GMasterAres]

Pretty sure AFB can be made 4 lanes each direction, but as has been mentioned, it isn't the only issue. It's a bit of a dog's breakfast that area unfortunately and with the bog right there, not an easy solution from an environmental impact. And tolls or traffic diversion (to another connection) isn't possible as a lot of the traffic is truck traffic causing issues and they simply need to go from SFPR to Annacis Island. That will never change, Annacis Island and Tilbury (on SFPR) are two major industrial areas.

AFB is the most efficient link between the two.

Though I do argue sometimes the fact that a few trees to save 392839283 cars sitting idle for 30 minutes is a better environmental trade off. Cars sitting idle pollute a heck of a lot more than a bit of bog/trees. Not everyone sees it that way though and I don't think there will be an immediate solution.

Maybe they need to get rid of that weigh scale too. Locate it somewhere else?

It is a bad spot and largely why the second set of lights are there and trucks back up. They have to make a left turn, go through weigh scale, then make another left turn back.

[Mininari]

How could you make the AFB 4 lanes in each direction??? The roadway width between the cable-stay cables is clearly wide enough for 6 lanes with virtually no shoulder space. Is it possible to build an extra lane on the outside of the cables? The real question then would be if the bridge itself was engineered to handle such a possibility.

Regarding my past comments about a truck-climbing lane up the big hill past 104th (southbound towards hwy 1), I wonder how much pressure the Golden Ears Connector will take off that problem, since the GEC roadway will link directly to the huge industrial park in Walnut Grove. Some of the trucks will certainly divert to the direct route to the industrial park & Golden Ears Bridge.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Pretty sure AFB can be made 4 lanes each direction

The bridge was designed so that additional lanes could be added - but they already have been. It originally opened with two lanes in each direction and has since been expanded to three (one year after it opened). That's as far as it goes.

[Metro-One]

The ALB does not need to be expanded.

Making the SFPR (17) 91 connections a free flow interchange would reduce / eliminate most of the problems.

At the bare minimum it would allow through SFPR traffic to be free flow.

For those saying more people should take the Port Mann instead of the AFB, the problem there is that in general those two bridges serve rather different travel patterns. Also to take the SFPR to the Port Mann would involve a major backtrack (and sorry, an interchange between the #1 and the SFPR near the Port Man would require some very creative and expensive engineering).

The missing link in this problem after such an interhcange is built is the new Patullo Bridge...

A new Patullo Bridge can service many of the same travel patterns as those using the AFB from the SFPR. This is why the Patullo needs to be 6 lanes and have a better connection built between its north end and the destinations to the north and east. Ironically, even though New West is super against this, I believe such a structure / design would actually greatly reduce traffic through the heart of New West, as those coming to and from the west would no longer take the AFB / Queenburough (and then driving through downtown New West), but would instead take the SFPR and then the new Patullo.

All this together would better distribute traffic in general throughout the area.

Of course, I would support tolls for all of these structures.

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

The bridge was designed so that additional lanes could be added - but they already have been. It originally opened with two lanes in each direction and has since been expanded to three (one year after it opened). That's as far as it goes.

Huh, learn something new.

Credit: Waite Air Photography

[WarrenC12]

IIRC there was no 91 connector at the time. Certainly no overpass, I remember a traffic light in the area.

[Whalleyboy]

I think one of the big help would be making SFPR the main road going on to AFB. the current 2 turn lanes merge to one left turn lane which has to wait for on coming traffic to pass then after that turn has to merge with nordel which has right of way is the part that the huge pain in the —.

[officedweller]

Bumps to be fixed:


Transportation ministry working on fix for South Fraser Perimeter Road
http://www.cknw.com/2016/02/15/transportation-ministry-working-on-fix/

[GMasterAres]

There have been quite a few "bumps" on the SFPR. Used to be one not far west of the 91 connector where a few weeks before they finally fixed it you'd actually get air-born traveling at the speed limit of 80. My car is low so I actually had to slow to 70 or less and would sometimes (if I hit it wrong) actually scrape the bottom front of my car.

I know the ones they're talking about and they are pretty bad too. I guess to be expected given the SFPR is almost entirely built in the flood plain.

[CurtisVerbatim]

Originally Posted by jhausner

There have been quite a few "bumps" on the SFPR. Used to be one not far west of the 91 connector where a few weeks before they finally fixed it you'd actually get air-born traveling at the speed limit of 80. My car is low so I actually had to slow to 70 or less and would sometimes (if I hit it wrong) actually scrape the bottom front of my car.

I know the ones they're talking about and they are pretty bad too. I guess to be expected given the SFPR is almost entirely built in the flood plain.

there were two sets of table-top like bumps west of the 91 connector due to the appropriated land previously being pre-loaded in preparation for what I can only guess was going to be warehouses in the tilbury area. you can still see where it was pre-loaded as there are large mounds next to the road.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1476503,-122.9817615,64a,20y,90h,83.43t/data=!3m1!1e3
and
https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1485726,-122.9676181,38a,20y,90h,83.56t/data=!3m1!1e3
https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.1485711,-...UyNnG11ZCQi1hX-HUAEyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[SOSS]

How is the "quiet" asphalt holding up?